Micing an amp in the recording studio.

[rasputin1963]

I'm not a guitarist, but I know there is a long creative tradition in the recording studio of micing the guitarist's amp. In my ignorance and naivete' I had thought that with all electrified instruments, you'd want to line-feed the signal directly to the recording apparatus, the better to get the "cleanest" instrument sound you possibly could.

 

What sonic "magic" happens when you mic an amplifier in the studio? Is it a risky procedure? ie., placing sensitive, expensive mics near an amplified signal? I guess, when micing an amp, you'll end up with your instrument both assuming whatever qualities/color the particular amp bestows, and also picking up room sound (and possible bleed from other musicians?).

 

What is your experience/practice/opinions/lore about micing an amp in the recording studio?

 

Thanks, ras

[gismo recording]

I'm not a guitarist, but I know there is a long creative tradition in the recording studio of micing the guitarist's amp. In my ignorance and naivete' I had thought that with all electrified instruments, you'd want to line-feed the signal directly to the recording apparatus, the better to get the "cleanest" instrument sound you possibly could.

 

What sonic "magic" happens when you mic an amplifier in the studio? Is it a risky procedure? ie., placing sensitive, expensive mics near an amplified signal? I guess, when micing an amp, you'll end up with your instrument both assuming whatever qualities/color the particular amp bestows, and also picking up room sound (and possible bleed from other musicians?).

 

What is your experience/practice/opinions/lore about micing an amp in the recording studio?

 

Thanks, ras

 

The bolded part is the reason you do it.

[Phil O'Keefe]

I'm not a guitarist, but I know there is a long creative tradition in the recording studio of micing the guitarist's amp. In my ignorance and naivete' I had thought that with all electrified instruments, you'd want to line-feed the signal directly to the recording apparatus, the better to get the "cleanest" instrument sound you possibly could.

 

A direct feed may be "cleaner" in some respects, but unless it's processed in some way, it usually will sound rather un-natural.

 

What sonic "magic" happens when you mic an amplifier in the studio?

 

A microphone picks up air - specifically the compression and rarefaction that occurs as sound moves through air molecules. With a guitar amp, that is produced by the vibrating speaker. You also get acoustical influence on the recorded sound when you use a microphone; early reflections and ambience - of course the amount of this will depend on the actual acoustical environment the amp is in and the type of mic used (particularly the polar pattern) and its placement and distance from the amplifier.

 

A guitar amp's speaker is a crucial element of the amp's sound. Not only does it filter out many frequencies (typically just about everything over 6kHz or so) that would be present in a direct feed, but it also responds to others within its range in a less than linear fashion. All of this changes the sound significantly over a direct input signal - especially if that signal isn't run through any kind of a speaker simulator.

 

Is it a risky procedure? ie., placing sensitive, expensive mics near an amplified signal?

 

For your typical moving coil dynamic mic, it's generally a non-issue. If you choose to use a condenser or ribbon (both are commonly used on guitar amps too), there are some things to be aware of, but it's generally not a huge issue.

 

I guess, when micing an amp, you'll end up with your instrument both assuming whatever qualities/color the particular amp bestows, and also picking up room sound (and possible bleed from other musicians?).

 

Correct - again, depending on the room and situation, and the mic you use and its placement, those things can be minimized - or accentuated. A little bleed isn't always a bad thing.

 

What is your experience/practice/opinions/lore about micing an amp in the recording studio?

 

Thanks, ras

 

I tend to use microphones much more often than I use direct signals, but both have their uses.

 

[WRGKMC]

As for getting a good sound. I wear good isolation headphones and move the mic round to find the best spot. Allot of people put the mic right up in the cone but that's not always the best spot. Last time I miced my cab I found the ideal spot about 2~3' in front of the cab. Up close the bass response was too high and since it was a tube amp the hiss level was high up close to the speaker too. Dialing it back on the amp didn't sound right. Backing the mic away from the cab reduced the mics proximity effect to cut bass and reduced hiss levels.

 

The more important item was the strings responded naturally. Guitar parts can sound better if the sound and string attack match what the guitarist is playing and feeling. If I had just miced the cab up close I would have wound up having to use an EQ plugin. With the right mic placement I EQed the part without EQ and even added a little room ambiance which sounded good.

 

I do record direct and miced on and off all the time. In my one rig I do both at the same time.

 

Which method works better? With the right gear for tracking direct, its impossible to tell the difference with your ears so it comes down to getting the sound and providing realistic string touch.

 

I think allot of guitarists prefer a miced cab because that's all they own and its what they're used to. They probably haven't used really good hardware based direct system and don't realize how good it can actually be. Others may have tried it something like a DI box directly off the pickups and would up with a completely clean, dry and sterile sound. I wouldn't blame them for disliking that for anything but an electric acoustic guitar.

 

The only big advantage a guitar amp has is its louder and if you use self sustaining strings as a playing technique a cab can provide enough volume to generate those. The other item would be the room reflections captured by a mic. If those reflections are bad it can actually introduce phase issues which can hurt the sound.

 

My Marshall Valvestate has a speaker emulated line out. I can record the cab while recording direct at the same time and if you hear both tracks side by side in a blind comparison You'd mostly like choose the DI over the miced track. The emulated output comes after the power amp and captures any tones the power tubes and transformer create.

 

A normal line out on the other hand comes before the power section and will sound very raw in comparison. You'd need allot more processing to make it sound good. Usually a High and Low bandpass filter will roll off the frequencies the speaker does and some compression to tame dynamics and mimic the power amp, transformer, speakers .

 

That would still leave you with a completely dry track. You'd have to add your time based effects to develop a room sound. My studio is so sound proofed I don't get any worthwhile refection do all micing does is color the sound and reduce dynamics. I'd have to use reverbs or echoes to get a good room sound live or direct.

 

I'm not knocking a miced amp because it can do a good job too, but with many of the modeling preamps today you can dial up dozens of amp types that are going to sound just as good as the amps in most mixes.

[rasputin1963]

Thanks very much guys. Great responses, much appreciated.

[Etienne Rambert]

I'm not a guitarist, but I know there is a long creative tradition in the recording studio of micing the guitarist's amp. In my ignorance and naivete' I had thought that with all electrified instruments, you'd want to line-feed the signal directly to the recording apparatus, the better to get the "cleanest" instrument sound you possibly could.

 

What sonic "magic" happens when you mic an amplifier in the studio? Is it a risky procedure? ie., placing sensitive, expensive mics near an amplified signal? I guess, when micing an amp, you'll end up with your instrument both assuming whatever qualities/color the particular amp bestows, and also picking up room sound (and possible bleed from other musicians?).

 

What is your experience/practice/opinions/lore about micing an amp in the recording studio?

 

Thanks, ras

 

My setup:

 

1. guitar into pedals

2. pedals into amp - no mic. on amp

3. Direct mono OUT from amp into mixer.

 

I like this arrangement because it allows me to use EITHER amp OR

mixing board or BOTH if I mic. the amp.

[UstadKhanAli]

Many instruments - guitar, bass, keyboards - sound considerably better when miked through an amp. After all, that's how we usually listen to them. I regularly amp or re-amp my keyboards, as do others such as Bruce Swedien, and and the sound has more of an organic quality and blends nicely.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Yeah, that's very true Ken. It's kind of funny, but we spend all kinds of effort and money on things like summing mixers and stereo bus compressors in an effort to get that fabled "glue" that helps tracks cohere, and while I think they can certainly help, I also think a lot of the time just putting the various sound sources into the same general acoustic environment can do wonders in that respect too. Especially on non-acoustic sources such as drum machines, keyboards, samples and so forth. Run 'em through an amp and speaker in the room where you recorded the vocals (and/or any other tracks you used mikes to record), and re-record that ambience to another track. Mix it in to taste or use it totally wet. Of course, separate acoustical environments can be successfully combined on the same recording too. String synths sound sooo much better IMO when you play them back over a PA system in a nice big hall.

[Phil O'Keefe]

 

My setup:

 

1. guitar into pedals

2. pedals into amp - no mic. on amp

3. Direct mono OUT from amp into mixer.

 

I like this arrangement because it allows me to use EITHER amp OR

mixing board or BOTH if I mic. the amp.

 

A lot of people like to use both in the studio. Another advantage of recording both a direct signal along with your amp microphones is that it gives you the ability to Reamp later if you want / need to. Plus it also allows you the option of processing the direct signal with amp / cabinet sim plugins.

[UstadKhanAli]

Yeah' date=' that's very true Ken. It's kind of funny, but we spend all kinds of effort and money on things like summing mixers and stereo bus compressors in an effort to get that fabled "glue" that helps tracks cohere, and while I think they can certainly help, I also think a lot of the time just putting the various sound sources into the same general acoustic environment can do wonders in that respect too. [/quote']

 

And I feel like it's often an easier solution by the time you get through doing everything. This is whether you are getting everyone in the room and going for it, which is my favorite way, or overdubbing in that same environment, or if necessary, re-amping them in the same environment.

 

Especially on non-acoustic sources such as drum machines, keyboards, samples and so forth. Run 'em through an amp and speaker in the room where you recorded the vocals (and/or any other tracks you used mikes to record), and re-record that ambience to another track. Mix it in to taste or use it totally wet. Of course, separate acoustical environments can be successfully combined on the same recording too. String synths sound sooo much better IMO when you play them back over a PA system in a nice big hall.

 

You can use all sorts of different microphone techniques if you re-amp, creating a real sense of physicality and space. I love this. It's fun, it's creative, and it sounds GREAT and provides additional options.

 

I cannot begin to tell you how many times I get someone asking, "how did you get such a great sound?" with specific things.

 

"How did you get such a great guitar sound?"

"I played a great guitar through a great amp and stuck a great mic in front of it."

 

"How do your keyboards sound so natural?"

"I recorded them naturally, playing it through a speaker and miking it up with the rest of the instruments."

 

"How do you get such a sense of depth?"

"I moved the microphone farther away from the sound source."

 

These are fairly simple solutions. I'm not saying this because I'm so great and I can get this amazing sound. No. Anyone can do this. I'm offering this because it's easy to do, fun, and great sounding.

 

[UstadKhanAli]

What sonic "magic" happens when you mic an amplifier in the studio? Is it a risky procedure? ie., placing sensitive, expensive mics near an amplified signal?

 

People use ribbon microphones shoved right up on a loud amp, so I'd say no.

 

I use a variety of microphones, depending on what I want and what sort of sound I've got going. I might use a large diaphragm condenser in omni for a clean sound while using a dynamic directional mic for something else. Depends on what the situation is, what I want to achieve, what the sound is, what I'm using the other microphones for, where I am, etc.

 

But none of my choices are based on whether I think I'm going to do damage to a microphone or not. I'm not going to ruin it.

 

The only time I've ever considered damage to a microphone is for tom and snare microphones, and that's not due to volume...that's due to errant hits from a stick.

 

 

[Ernest Buckley]

I'm not a guitarist, but I know there is a long creative tradition in the recording studio of micing the guitarist's amp. In my ignorance and naivete' I had thought that with all electrified instruments, you'd want to line-feed the signal directly to the recording apparatus, the better to get the "cleanest" instrument sound you possibly could.

 

What sonic "magic" happens when you mic an amplifier in the studio? Is it a risky procedure? ie., placing sensitive, expensive mics near an amplified signal? I guess, when micing an amp, you'll end up with your instrument both assuming whatever qualities/color the particular amp bestows, and also picking up room sound (and possible bleed from other musicians?).

 

What is your experience/practice/opinions/lore about micing an amp in the recording studio?

 

Thanks, ras

 

Its funny David, on my first record we recorded guitar using one of those guitar pod boxes. Thankfully, we only used it on 2-3 songs, the rest of the guitar tracks went through amps. Listening back, what I feel those direct tracks lack is air. I don`t know how else to explain it but something happens in that space between the amp and the mic. After that project, I swore I would never use a pod or software simulators…

 

That was 10 years ago and technology has come a very long way in amp stimulation. Today, I have no problem recording direct or with an amp. I usually record guitarists with what they are comfortable with. For myself, I have used a combination of amp and direct. And when I say direct, I`m routing the guitar through an Avalon 737 and then using either the Waves GTR3 or Native Instruments Guitar Rig. Both plug ins sound exceptional.

 

I know guitarists like to record with an amp because there is a long time relationship there with their sound… I don`t have that relationship so leaning towards software more and more as I go along doesn`t seem to interfere with my workflow or sound.

 

The funny thing is, one of the tunes on my next record has two lead guitar parts panned hard left, hard right and the parts have a call and response to them. When I played the track to my guitar friend, he was impressed with the guitars. What I didn`t tell him until he said that was that both guitars were actually coming from Reasons sound bank. So… software has gotten to the point now where it can trick a guitarist!

 

Granted there are some things that I still find software to lack but its getting better and better so… its a fine line these days….

[Anderton]

Very interesting you should mention "air." When I was designing the CA-X amp sims for SONAR I tried to emulate that effect with reverbs and such but it didn't really work. Then when playing guitar one night through an amp I realized that you're moving around - so there are constant, tiny changes in frequency response, and I thought that might be what gives a guitar "life." I worked very hard on emulating that effect with some of the amp models, and I think it may be one reason for their acceptance among SONAR users.

[WRGKMC]

I been thinking about getting that new version of Span. It allows multi channel frequency analysis. I'd track direct off the pickup, the Preamp, the head output and a mic and maybe even a mic from the listening position then superimpose all the response curves on top of each other.

 

I've done this many times using Harbal which creates a static shot of tracks and you can add one as a reference. some parts of the waves change very little and others change allot, especially in the low and high end. There's definitely a difference in dynamic response. As you get farther down the chain the peaks are much tamer and with drive it flattens peaks leaving the lower dynamic peaks alone.

[UstadKhanAli]

It's funny...I have a great sounding amp, I really do. I feel like I can stick ANY mic in front of it, have it powered by ANY mic preamp, and bam....instant great tone.

 

What combination I choose is purely determined by what my personal preferences and the emotional and artistic statement of the song is, but sonically, if you have a great guitar through a great amp, It is. So. Easy.

 

I do realize that not everyone can do this, so I'm aware of circumstances in which one might have to go DI or do something else, but I gotta tell you, if you can, try it.

[WRGKMC]

^^^ I have like 9 different guitar amps and 4 bass amps in the studio and get different tones from each separately or use them in combinations. Add to that maybe 60 pedals,of various types there a pretty good variety of tones happening.

 

The thing is those 9 guitar amps can get old over time especially if you're multitracking guitar parts using different setups.

 

Having direct and digital options expands that pallet of colors well beyond anything you can get from amps alone. I have dozens of DI options with Preamps, Multi effects, Tape echoes, you name it. Then add the 30 guitars and 5 basses to choose from I can be as creative with my tones as I can be writing musical arrangements.

 

The only tough part is going back and listening to older recordings and trying to figure out what the heck you used to get those tones. Some are easily identified as live amps because they may have some feedback or live drums/vocals. For other stuff I may not have a clue. So much of the performers skills shapes the tones. I just say, sounds good use it and feel free to experiment and refine other techniques you may not have considered using.

 

Some can have a big learning curve for getting the best tones especially virtual amps and effects. I don't know why it its but with analog gear I have complete control over levels and tones, even the DI gear. Virtual stuff I feel like I'm an astronaut that's floating in space with no line. Finding the correct gain staging levels is still hit or miss.

 

With analog gear the gain staging levels are fixed and you build upon those initial levels. Feeding a computer, all you have is the interface gain (if it has one, mine doesn't) After that you have to trust these plugins are doing things the right way to mimic analog. Thing is they aren't analog and you can be off allot and still get a decent sound, at least till you start stacking stuff up, then it falls apart.

 

Zeroing in on good analog settings is almost as if you're drawn to them. This is because you are doing tow things at the same time, you're minimizing the bad sound and unwanted noise while dialing up the good.

 

Digital produces mostly good so half your judgment dialing up optimal tones is impaired. Unless you're way too low or high due to its wide dynamic range you can get an initial sound that's good. The problem is you got to jack with the levels before hitting another effect or it may not provide optimal response.

[techristian]

From what I understand, the guitar player is familiar with the "feel" and settings of his own amp, and that is why they would rather have it recorded this way rather than have effects added in post processing. A guitar player that I knew liked to bring HIS OWN AMP regardless of the weight and his BACK for that very reason. Close mic pics up little room ambience because the amp is usually loud.

 

Dan

[Mark L]

This all makes for a very interesting read

 

I've hardly ever mic'd up an amp, main reason being that for the last 23 years I've lived in a house where I'm hemmed in by neighbours on both sides. Hence, I'm very aware of them hearing everything I do and I don't want to become a noise-nuisance. So I just plug my guitar straight into my recorder

 

That probably explains why the electric guitars on my recordings sound so digital

 

I really need a lottery win so that I can buy a detached house somewhere and have one of the rooms as a dedicated studio

[Ernest Buckley]

It's funny...I have a great sounding amp, I really do. I feel like I can stick ANY mic in front of it, have it powered by ANY mic preamp, and bam....instant great tone.

 

What combination I choose is purely determined by what my personal preferences and the emotional and artistic statement of the song is, but sonically, if you have a great guitar through a great amp, It is. So. Easy.

 

I do realize that not everyone can do this, so I'm aware of circumstances in which one might have to go DI or do something else, but I gotta tell you, if you can, try it.

 

I agree.

 

One other thing I forgot to mention… I work with several professional guitarists (guys who do a lot of touring and sessions)… these guys bring an assortment of amps and guitars to recording sessions, so I let them dial in their sound, then stick two mics in front of the amp (usually a 57 up close and a 4050 a few feet away) and away we go.

[Phil O'Keefe]

 

I agree.

 

One other thing I forgot to mention… I work with several professional guitarists (guys who do a lot of touring and sessions)… these guys bring an assortment of amps and guitars to recording sessions, so I let them dial in their sound, then stick two mics in front of the amp (usually a 57 up close and a 4050 a few feet away) and away we go.

 

 

There's a reason why I have so many guitars and amps... it's not just for my own enjoyment, although I certainly use and enjoy them, but lots of other musicians do too - the assortment allows us substantial variety to draw on when recording.

[UstadKhanAli]

And the thing with a great amp is that I can jack the EQ controls all the way up if I want and it sounds....well, if I jack the treble, it sounds like a bright guitar. If I jack the bass, it sounds like a bassy guitar. I don't think, "Oh, okay, I have to roll off the high end to prevent that 'fizzy' sound." I don't have to mess with any of it. I plug my guitar in, turn on the amp, and it sounds GREAT.

 

I've done NOTHING and it sounds great.

 

Any other adjustments are purely subjective. I'm not fixing anything. I'm not trying to make it sound "realistic". I'm not futzing.

 

Bang. Done.

 

Then, as I mentioned in the other post, if I want, I can pretty much put any microphone in front and it sounds great. Why? Because it already sounds great. Doesn't matter. Sure, I use great microphones, but with any reasonably decent microphone/mic preamp combination, the guitar sounds great.

 

I love great sounding solutions. And I love easy solutions.

 

Oh, and as a bonus, I can get as much room sound as I want. More room sound? Add another mic. Move a microphone farther away. Use omni. Whatever. Sky's the limit. Easy. Great. Done.

 

 

[WRGKMC]

And the thing with a great amp is that I can jack the EQ controls all the way up if I want and it sounds....well, if I jack the treble, it sounds like a bright guitar. If I jack the bass, it sounds like a bassy guitar. I don't think, "Oh, okay, I have to roll off the high end to prevent that 'fizzy' sound." I don't have to mess with any of it. I plug my guitar in, turn on the amp, and it sounds GREAT.

 

I've done NOTHING and it sounds great.

 

You can do that with a good preamp/effects unit designed for recording too. Some of the newer ones with amp/cab emulation are truly fantastic, and in many ways it can be easier. You aren't dealing with mics and positioning, there is no bleed over, and selecting a preset is one push of a button. Of course tweaking the sound can be a little more involved but no more then an foot pedal in front of an amp.

 

The best part is you can dial up the exact tone through the monitors you want. If you have a smaller studio with the amp and recorder in the same room, chances are the amp is going to be too loud to hear what you're actually getting through the monitors, and due to the tonal coloration you get from headphones, the tracks may not be optimal for the mix. To correct that you will wind up having to do allot more tweaking using EQ plugins mixing.

 

You may save time tracking and turn around spending that time tweaking the mix and loosing quality with every additional plugin used. Its got challenges both ways. Of course if you have a separate control room and can hear the monitors isolated from the live amps its the best way to go. You'll immediately know if a mics set right and get a much better track from the get go.

 

If you use a modeling preamp, your monitors are your guitar/bass amp. Its excellent for multitracking if you can get used to the reduced volume levels. What you hear is exactly what's being tracked and all you have to do is get track gains up. Of course if you're used to playing really loud, you'd have to have good enough monitors to handle the guitar and the track playback at the same time. (one reason why I have multiple sets of monitors and can also crank the PA)

 

Of course playing back through the monitors and having the rest of the tracks play back at the same time can have its issues too. I prefer to get my guitar levels to fit into the playback mix which can sometimes result in a low DB track that needs to be boosted. If the guitars too loud you can mask the rhythm or miss changes. You need to acclimate your playing skills to those challenges.

 

When I work with the band and track live amps, I don't use headphones. I did for a long time and thought I was getting something good that way. After awhile I abandoned that approach. So long as I get the levels set the mic is going to track its full frequency response and I was better off getting the best sounds from the amp itself then judging the results at the end of a long garden hose at the end of the chain. Of course having everything set up and having done many test recordings to get optimal mic placement and levels is needed for the open ear method. I wore headphones for at least 10 years living in an apartment and hate using them so I limit their use to vocal work.

 

Again, they are both great methods if you take the time to refine them. Yes you could wind up with some sterile sounding tracks recording DI if you don't know how to get the tracks to sound live. On the flip side, if you wanted a sterile sound from a miced amp you may have to work hard to get that.

[UstadKhanAli]

 

You can do that with a good preamp/effects unit designed for recording too. Some of the newer ones with amp/cab emulation are truly fantastic, and in many ways it can be easier. You aren't dealing with mics and positioning, there is no bleed over, and selecting a preset is one push of a button. Of course tweaking the sound can be a little more involved but no more then an foot pedal in front of an amp.

 

I know everyone's different...but I want to be able to tweak the mics. I want to get some of the room going. I want bleed.

 

I have a great amp. I want that sound.

 

My amp sounds better than just about any other amp I've ever heard or used, so I'm pretty sure it's therefore better than any other DI method...certainly better sounding than any one I've ever heard or used. I want the best.

 

Thankfully, the best for me is also the easiest.

 

I get if people don't have a great amp (mine is a Carr Rambler), cannot record loud amps, don't have the space, don't have the microphone, whatever. I've recorded direct before.

 

But wowwwww....what a sound you can get so simply and naturally. The sort of sound that brings smiles to people's faces and gets them doing high fives. The kind that gives you goose bumps. That's what I want.

 

 

[Folder]

 

The only tough part is going back and listening to older recordings and trying to figure out what the heck you used to get those tones.

 

The "Money for Nothing" tone was a happy accident that couldn't be reproduced.

 

"I remember Mark's Les Paul Junior going through a Laney amp, and that was the sound of 'Money For Nothing'," says Dorfsman. "We were actually going for a sort of ZZ Top sound, but what we ended up getting was kind of an accident. Mark would be in the control room and we'd run a lead out to the main area, and I remember getting a channel set up to monitor, heading out to the room to move the mics around, and Mark's guitar tech Ron Eve getting on the talkback and telling me not to touch anything because it sounded amazing as it was.

 

"One mic was pointing down at the floor, another was not quite on the speaker, another was somewhere else, and it wasn't how I would want to set things up — it was probably just left from the night before, when I'd been preparing things for the next day and had not really finished the setup. Nevertheless, whether it was the phase of the mics or the out-of-phaseness, what we heard was exactly what ended up on the record. There was no additional processing on that tune during the mix.

 

"Later on, we tried to recreate that guitar sound at the Power Station with the same amp, same setup and same models of microphone, but we could never get it. I'd drawn extensive pictures and had a little map of how everything was set up, but there must have been something weird going on to make the guitar sound that way in Montserrat, because in New York it sounded like a cleaner, karaoke version of the same thing. I messed around with it for a good couple of hours, but Mark was just getting bored and wanted to move on. The whole thing was very confusing.

 

"Later on, a lot of people asked me how I got the sound on the record, but it was just one of those happy accidents that have not happened to me very often. I don't know if something was broken, but we could not recreate that sound again. All I know is, it was the sound of Mark playing, using his fingers instead of a pick, together with the Laney amp. It felt and sounded so good that I just had him do five or six passes and later comped something together and wound up using a couple of the passes in the final mix, putting a double in at certain points even though that wasn't something he normally did."

 

 

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may06/articles/classictracks_0506.htm

 

 

 

 

 

[Anderton]

My amp sounds better than just about any other amp I've ever heard or used, so I'm pretty sure it's therefore better than any other DI method...certainly better sounding than any one I've ever heard or used. I want the best.

 

For me, guitar amps are like reverb chambers - there's only one preset, but it's a great preset Of course mic placement makes a difference, but the sound is fundamentally "there." There are exceptions, like the Line 6 DT25, which is exceptionally versatile. I also have an Orange Tiny Terror and a Peavey Windsor amp, so when I want an amp sound, I can get an amp sound.

 

Where amps fall down for me is trying to go beyond that sound, or have a timbre that meshes better with synthesized sounds. The reason why I designed the 16 amps for SONAR wasn't to emulate other amps, but to get amp sounds that aren't possible in the real world...sort of a CGI version of amp sounds.

 

The story from Folder about the "Money for Nothing" sound is interesting and proves the point about "happy accidents." However, IMHO if the sound had been different, it wouldn't have impacted the song much...it's the part that sounds so cool.